Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,816
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 17:
Line 17: + + + +
→Loss of incentives to create new drugs/treatments: edit
==Loss of incentives to create new drugs/treatments==
==Loss of incentives to create new drugs/treatments==
The White House Council of Economic Advisers issued a report in June 2009 explaining the [[Obama administration]]'s goal of reducing projected health spending by 30% over the next two decades. That reduction would be achieved by eliminating "high cost, low-value treatments," by "implementing a set of performance measures that all providers would adopt," and by "directly targeting individual providers . . . (and other) high-end outliers."
Obama emphasized the importance of limiting services to "health care that works." To identify such care, he provided more than $1 billion in the [[American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009]] to jump-start Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) and to finance a federal CER advisory council. Comparative effectiveness would become the vehicle for deciding whether each method of treatment provides enough of an improvement in health care to justify cost. The existence of such a program in the U.S. similiar the British NHS's Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) would not only deny lifesaving care but would also cast a pall over medical researchers who would fear that government experts might reject their discoveries as "too expensive."<ref>http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204683204574358233780260914.html?mod=djemEditorialPage</ref>
==Loss of personal income to the government==
==Loss of personal income to the government==